Political Ponerology: A science on the nature of evil and politics

[dutchdemocrat]

Andrew M. Lobaczewski, is a Polish psychologist. Now 84, he was part of a secret research project in Eastern Europe under communist rule collecting data from his clinical work.

He noticed a high correlation between acts we would classify as "evil" and pathologies that were able to be clinically diagnosed in the perpetrators.

One of the points that Lobaczewski makes is that psychopaths are aware of their difference from normal people. They have a certain special knowledge that comes from their study of us, and they are experts in manipulation. Moreover, the smarter ones work together to orient social movements and whole societies when they come to power in the direction of pathological values.

Different pathological types play different roles at different moments in the development of a social movement, until, at the end, the essential psychopaths have taken over control. Lobaczewski looks at how these different types work together. His analysis suggests that the dominant ideology that brings the pathocracy to power is less important than the pathological underpinnings, which is why fascism, communism, and, more and more, democracies, share the same dynamic.

http://ponerology.blogspot.com/2005/12/political-ponerology-science-on-nature.html

Rumsfeld-Cheney-Bush et al.

[hopeisaplace]

1. thanks, very interesting stuff

[SoCalDem]

2. Propaganda can make just about anyone "evil"..

and can also cleanse the truly evil ones:(

[xchrom]

3. leo straus's archetype?

straus talks about certain leaders existing in a kind of moral vacuum in order to create/achieve their set conservative agenda -- was he accidently talking about creatures like these?

[rman]

5. Strauss, Machiavelli, Plato,

yes they are talking about those kinds of creatures. Also they say it is the only possible way for people to be ruled. And they have all sorts of (pseudo) philosophical arguments to back it up.
Strauss and Machiavelli in particular were more then just observers, they were enablers.

[xchrom]

6. i'm being specific when i pick out strauss.

and i agree with your list re: machiavelli and plato{though i think plato might have some ethical problems unethical tyrnts, funny that.}.

strauss is key to understanding our current political landscape -- and strauss does something peculiar -- he opens up his thinking to a CLASS of people that plato and machiavelli probably wouldn't.

anyway too esoteric, i guess.

[rman]

8. I agree with you on the role of Strauss.

Not sure what you mean by "too esoteric".

[xchrom]

9. just that it seems that most people aren't interested

in how we got here.

that it has a philosophy -- a disciplined outlook.

a history -- that it has an academic base -- i.e. strauss's chief protege{i forget his name} teaches history at harvard of all places.

the repukes took the long view in the 70's to regaining political power.
and we are beginning to see some of those fruits.

for most folk -- i think this stuff seems like minutiae.

[rman]

4. "pathological values", a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts;

The more greedy and egotistical people become, the more people will suffer from being (socially, economically) isolated - so the more attractive it becomes for those people to become greedy and egotistical as well.

[Hugin]

7. Indeed... Very interesting!

I would guess this is the reason all dictatorships resemble each other
no matter what their political origins were.

Fascists, Communist, and now "Democratic Dictatorship" AKA "Unitary Presidency".

[leftchick]

10. this certainly explains a lot

:scared: